Trump ignites new firestorm: Gun backers might stop Clinton

[Publicus]

 

Posting about Trump and guns, to include the Trump "professional" staff and that there is another violence lawsuit occurring in the Trump campaign.

 

Y'know, the 2nd Amendment people.

[Grouse]

You know how we go on about moderate Muslims not protesting Muslim terrorist crimes?

 

what about moderate Republicans accepting the fact that giving war weapons to red necks is, er, unwise?

 

Hillary DOES want to take these weapons away. That's sane.

 

As for Trump encouraging supporters to take direct action, well, how irresponsible.

 

Anyway, Trump will go down and take much of the house with him.

[MissAndry]

6 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Anyway, Trump will go down and take much of the house with him.

 

Only after they have pried the gun from his cold dead fingers.

Edited August 12, 2016 by MissAndry
spelling

[Neurath]

38 minutes ago, MissAndry said:

 

Only after they have pried the gun from his cold dead fingers.

Does he have them made specially to fit his hands and fingers? 

 

[Shawn0000]

4 hours ago, Scotwight said:

Just trying to stay current.  What topic are you posting about?

 

Yeah, because Trump calling on the gun nuts to take action and him failing to take action on one of his campaigners being nutty with a gun are just totally unrelated, right?

[Pinot]

5 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

 

You're feeding in the paranoia of gun-owners. And that's not HRC's position.  She's against assault-and military type weapons.  She's ok with non-assault and non-semi-automatic weapons owned by law-abiding citizens.

 

 

Similar to my missive above in response to Pinot, you're feeding into gun huggers' intransigence by saying 'nobody in America should have guns.'  In a near-perfect world with sane people, sure, that would be plausible.  But we live in a very imperfect world, and there are a lot of crazies out there - some of whom look like the most upstanding citizens .....until they go bezerk.

 

Perhaps your statement it too sweeping.  Law enforcement and military should be allowed to have serious weapons while on duty.  As for everyone else, ....that's debatable.  And I include vets, ex-cops, and nearly everyone else in that category (of not owning assault weapons), because they're all human. By being human, they're subject to losing their temper and going apeshit, like just about anyone else.  Let them go apeshit, but doing so with a loaded weapon in their hands, makes them a lot more of serious problem waiting to happen.   Gun lovers will try to convince us that their friends and family are all too cool-headed and responsible to ever go postal with guns.  Uh Huh.  Every criminal is loved by his mother too.   They're all likeable until the moment they go beserk.

 

No it's not HRC's position. Not many American politicians have the cajones to do what the Aussis did. Really, screw these paranoid jerks. 

 

I'm not suppose to feed the paranoia of the wingnuts? It's my raison d'etre!

 

Man, I used to get a giggle. Now all I have is a broken hand from facepalming so much.  

[Ulysses G.]

6 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

 

You're feeding in the paranoia of gun-owners. And that's not HRC's position.  She's against assault-and military type weapons.  She's ok with non-assault and non-semi-automatic weapons owned by law-abiding citizens.

 

 

Actually, he is being honest and much of the left feel this way. They will ban guns if they can get away with it.

 

Semi-automatic  "assault weapons" are no different than hunting rifles -  other than storing more cartridges. Banning them is going to be only the first step. All guns can kill people and animals.

By the way, automatic weapons are almost impossible to get unless one has a special license and a lot of money.

 

Hillary's "position" (on pretty much everything) all depends on the political winds. That is why gun owners don't trust her. She spoke out against gay marriage until the tide turned politically. She "evolved" in 2011 when it was politically expedient.

 

"Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been, between a man and a woman."

-Hillary Clinton (2000)

Edited August 12, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[iReason]

^^^ @Post 217 UG

 

"All guns can kill people and animals."

Brilliant deduction. 

Thanks for making the argument for getting rid of them.

( Unless of course, you are of the sadistic minority that enjoys killing defenseless grazing animals for enjoyment and "leisure" )

 

But, but, but, Hillary...

[Ulysses G.]

3 hours ago, iReason said:

 

( Unless of course, you are of the sadistic minority that enjoys killing defenseless grazing animals for enjoyment and "leisure" )

 

I'm not, but, IMO, anyone who eats meat is a hypocrite if they criticize hunters. Industrial livestock operations  are a lot more cruel than killing them in the wild.